[Mick]

WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebrevesus backtracks.

https://freebeacon.com/national-security...anization/

From the article:

Contrary to claims from both Chinese officials and the World Health Organization, China did not report the existence of the coronavirus in late 2019, according to a WHO timeline tracking the spread of the virus. Rather, international health officials discovered the virus through information posted to a U.S. website."

[Mick]

WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebrevesus backtracks.

https://freebeacon.com/national-security...anization/

From the article:

Contrary to claims from both Chinese officials and the World Health Organization, China did not report the existence of the coronavirus in late 2019, according to a WHO timeline tracking the spread of the virus. Rather, international health officials discovered the virus through information posted to a U.S. website."

[Genuine Realist]

WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebrevesus backtracks.

https://freebeacon.com/national-security...anization/

From the article:

Contrary to claims from both Chinese officials and the World Health Organization, China did not report the existence of the coronavirus in late 2019, according to a WHO timeline tracking the spread of the virus. Rather, international health officials discovered the virus through information posted to a U.S. website."

Interesting. Way, way too early to write history on this phenomenon, particularly if there is any bias toward accountability.

[Genuine Realist]

WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebrevesus backtracks.

https://freebeacon.com/national-security...anization/

From the article:

Contrary to claims from both Chinese officials and the World Health Organization, China did not report the existence of the coronavirus in late 2019, according to a WHO timeline tracking the spread of the virus. Rather, international health officials discovered the virus through information posted to a U.S. website."

Interesting. Way, way too early to write history on this phenomenon, particularly if there is any bias toward accountability.

[BostonCard]

This seems to have already been known...

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/r/r46354

December 31: A machine translation of a Chinese media report about the outbreak is posted to ProMED, a U.S.- based open-access platform for early intelligence about infectious disease outbreaks. WHO headquarters in Geneva sees the ProMED post and instructs the WHO China Country Office to request verification of the outbreak from China’s government. | The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission issues its first public statement on the outbreak, saying it has identified 27 cases.

...

January 4: In its first public statement on the outbreak, WHO tweets, “China has reported to WHO a cluster of pneumonia cases—with no deaths—in Wuhan, Hubei Province.”

The congressional report was dated May 13. I assume that the reference to WHO officials discovering the virus through a US website refers to ProMED. Keep in mind, though, that ProMED posted a Chinese media report.

BC

[BostonCard]

This seems to have already been known...

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/r/r46354

December 31: A machine translation of a Chinese media report about the outbreak is posted to ProMED, a U.S.- based open-access platform for early intelligence about infectious disease outbreaks. WHO headquarters in Geneva sees the ProMED post and instructs the WHO China Country Office to request verification of the outbreak from China’s government. | The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission issues its first public statement on the outbreak, saying it has identified 27 cases.

...

January 4: In its first public statement on the outbreak, WHO tweets, “China has reported to WHO a cluster of pneumonia cases—with no deaths—in Wuhan, Hubei Province.”

The congressional report was dated May 13. I assume that the reference to WHO officials discovering the virus through a US website refers to ProMED. Keep in mind, though, that ProMED posted a Chinese media report.

BC

[lex24]

What a shock........

[lex24]

What a shock........

[BostonCard]

Isn’t it Trump that likes to recite the poem of “the snake?”

It ends with:

“Oh shut up, silly woman,” said the reptile with a grin
“You knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in

If only we’d have had epidemiologists from the NIH and CDC on the ground in Wuhan, we would not have been dependent on China to report the virus. Alas...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...er/608911/

So, I agree with Lex; China’s instinct to cover up and minimize reporting was predictable. So why would we have left ourselves in the position of having to depend on them to report it to the WHO? And now, like the poisoned woman from “the snake”, we are asking “why?”

BC

[BostonCard]

Isn’t it Trump that likes to recite the poem of “the snake?”

It ends with:

“Oh shut up, silly woman,” said the reptile with a grin
“You knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in

If only we’d have had epidemiologists from the NIH and CDC on the ground in Wuhan, we would not have been dependent on China to report the virus. Alas...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...er/608911/

So, I agree with Lex; China’s instinct to cover up and minimize reporting was predictable. So why would we have left ourselves in the position of having to depend on them to report it to the WHO? And now, like the poisoned woman from “the snake”, we are asking “why?”

BC

[Goose]

Isn’t it Trump that likes to recite the poem of “the snake?”

It ends with:

“Oh shut up, silly woman,” said the reptile with a grin
“You knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in

If only we’d have had epidemiologists from the NIH and CDC on the ground in Wuhan, we would not have been dependent on China to report the virus.  Alas...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...er/608911/

So, I agree with Lex; China’s instinct to cover up and minimize reporting was predictable.  So why would we have left ourselves in the position of having to depend on them to report it to the WHO?  And now, like the poisoned woman from “the snake”, we are asking “why?”

BC

I think that if we had the CDC/NIH people on the ground in China we would have known more but not much more. First, the Chinese themselves were initially pretty confused, and second the information flow to the observers would have been immediately cut off when the powers that be recognized there was a potentially embarrassing situation developing. That in  itself would have been a data point. Whether I am right or wrong about this isn't too important. Removing whatever visibility we had, even limited visibility, was just plain stupid. It may not have helped much, but it may have, and we voluntarily denied ourselves the information.

[Goose]

Isn’t it Trump that likes to recite the poem of “the snake?”

It ends with:

“Oh shut up, silly woman,” said the reptile with a grin
“You knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in

If only we’d have had epidemiologists from the NIH and CDC on the ground in Wuhan, we would not have been dependent on China to report the virus.  Alas...

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...er/608911/

So, I agree with Lex; China’s instinct to cover up and minimize reporting was predictable.  So why would we have left ourselves in the position of having to depend on them to report it to the WHO?  And now, like the poisoned woman from “the snake”, we are asking “why?”

BC

I think that if we had the CDC/NIH people on the ground in China we would have known more but not much more. First, the Chinese themselves were initially pretty confused, and second the information flow to the observers would have been immediately cut off when the powers that be recognized there was a potentially embarrassing situation developing. That in  itself would have been a data point. Whether I am right or wrong about this isn't too important. Removing whatever visibility we had, even limited visibility, was just plain stupid. It may not have helped much, but it may have, and we voluntarily denied ourselves the information.

[oregontim]

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

[oregontim]

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

[76lsjumb]

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

Maybe so... if the media and the Democrats hadn’t screamed non-stop that this was all just a hoax concocted by the Administration to divert attention from the Ukraine investigation and impeachment, which they indisputably would have done.

[76lsjumb]

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

Maybe so... if the media and the Democrats hadn’t screamed non-stop that this was all just a hoax concocted by the Administration to divert attention from the Ukraine investigation and impeachment, which they indisputably would have done.

[BostonCard]

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

Even the Chinese didn’t know anything was amiss in November.  While there were undoubtably cases of undiagnosed viral pneumonia going around late in 2019, they didn’t represent an unusual pattern.  Most were probably dismissed as influenza, but even if they were tested and came back for all pathogens, that wouldn’t have been that surprising.

It wasn’t until December 2019 (and really the last couple of weeks in December), that the Chinese started to see enough cases coming through the hospital as to raise questions of whether these were a cluster.

BC

---

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

Maybe so... if the media and the Democrats hadn’t screamed non-stop that this was all just a hoax concocted by the Administration to divert attention from the Ukraine investigation and impeachment, which they indisputably would have done.

And if that had been the case, I would gladly join you and others in chastising Democrats for not taking the pandemic seriously enough.  But instead of your hypothetical counterfactual, I am going to deal with the situation as it actually occurred, with the President not taking it seriously enough despite warnings not just from Democrats, but from experts in public health.  We also have 130,000 Americans dead, so forgive me for wondering whether a different approach by the President might have resulted in that number being smaller.

BC

---

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

Maybe so... if the media and the Democrats hadn’t screamed non-stop that this was all just a hoax concocted by the Administration to divert attention from the Ukraine investigation and impeachment, which they indisputably would have done.

And if that had been the case, I would gladly join you and others in chastising Democrats for not taking the pandemic seriously enough.  But instead of your hypothetical counterfactual, I am going to deal with the situation as it actually occurred, with the President not taking it seriously enough despite warnings not just from Democrats, but from experts in public health.  We also have 130,000 Americans dead, so forgive me for wondering whether a different approach by the President might have resulted in that number being smaller.

BC

[BostonCard]

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

Even the Chinese didn’t know anything was amiss in November.  While there were undoubtably cases of undiagnosed viral pneumonia going around late in 2019, they didn’t represent an unusual pattern.  Most were probably dismissed as influenza, but even if they were tested and came back for all pathogens, that wouldn’t have been that surprising.

It wasn’t until December 2019 (and really the last couple of weeks in December), that the Chinese started to see enough cases coming through the hospital as to raise questions of whether these were a cluster.

BC

---

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

Maybe so... if the media and the Democrats hadn’t screamed non-stop that this was all just a hoax concocted by the Administration to divert attention from the Ukraine investigation and impeachment, which they indisputably would have done.

And if that had been the case, I would gladly join you and others in chastising Democrats for not taking the pandemic seriously enough.  But instead of your hypothetical counterfactual, I am going to deal with the situation as it actually occurred, with the President not taking it seriously enough despite warnings not just from Democrats, but from experts in public health.  We also have 130,000 Americans dead, so forgive me for wondering whether a different approach by the President might have resulted in that number being smaller.

BC

---

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

Maybe so... if the media and the Democrats hadn’t screamed non-stop that this was all just a hoax concocted by the Administration to divert attention from the Ukraine investigation and impeachment, which they indisputably would have done.

And if that had been the case, I would gladly join you and others in chastising Democrats for not taking the pandemic seriously enough.  But instead of your hypothetical counterfactual, I am going to deal with the situation as it actually occurred, with the President not taking it seriously enough despite warnings not just from Democrats, but from experts in public health.  We also have 130,000 Americans dead, so forgive me for wondering whether a different approach by the President might have resulted in that number being smaller.

BC

[76lsjumb]

---

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

Maybe so... if the media and the Democrats hadn’t screamed non-stop that this was all just a hoax concocted by the Administration to divert attention from the Ukraine investigation and impeachment, which they indisputably would have done.

And if that had been the case, I would gladly join you and others in chastising Democrats for not taking the pandemic seriously enough.  But instead of your hypothetical counterfactual, I am going to deal with the situation as it actually occurred, with the President not taking it seriously enough despite warnings not just from Democrats, but from experts in public health.  We also have 130,000 Americans dead, so forgive me for wondering whether a different approach by the President might have resulted in that number being smaller.

BC

Wait a minute...Your hypothetical counterfactual is just as hypothetical and counterfactual as mine -- which of course is pretty much the definition of Monday-morning quarterbacking.  The things he DID do were criticized heavily at the time and NONE of the Democrats ever said anything close to "hey, we've got a big problem here Nancy and Adam and Chuck, let's call a halt to this whole impeachment thing and focus on the real problem.  Stop calling the President an existential threat every single chance you get and start talking about the REAL existential threat!"  If THEY had done that, I'd be praising them right along with you.  But forgive me for wondering whether a different approach by the Democrats and media -- one that wasn't so clearly focused on all things Ukrainian and non-COVID -- might have prompted a  more effective early response from the Administration.  Oh, and that part about Dr. Fauci saying early on that it wasn't that big a threat, that probably wasn't too helpful, either.

[76lsjumb]

---

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

Maybe so... if the media and the Democrats hadn’t screamed non-stop that this was all just a hoax concocted by the Administration to divert attention from the Ukraine investigation and impeachment, which they indisputably would have done.

And if that had been the case, I would gladly join you and others in chastising Democrats for not taking the pandemic seriously enough.  But instead of your hypothetical counterfactual, I am going to deal with the situation as it actually occurred, with the President not taking it seriously enough despite warnings not just from Democrats, but from experts in public health.  We also have 130,000 Americans dead, so forgive me for wondering whether a different approach by the President might have resulted in that number being smaller.

BC

Wait a minute...Your hypothetical counterfactual is just as hypothetical and counterfactual as mine -- which of course is pretty much the definition of Monday-morning quarterbacking.  The things he DID do were criticized heavily at the time and NONE of the Democrats ever said anything close to "hey, we've got a big problem here Nancy and Adam and Chuck, let's call a halt to this whole impeachment thing and focus on the real problem.  Stop calling the President an existential threat every single chance you get and start talking about the REAL existential threat!"  If THEY had done that, I'd be praising them right along with you.  But forgive me for wondering whether a different approach by the Democrats and media -- one that wasn't so clearly focused on all things Ukrainian and non-COVID -- might have prompted a  more effective early response from the Administration.  Oh, and that part about Dr. Fauci saying early on that it wasn't that big a threat, that probably wasn't too helpful, either.

[lex24]

Seriously, why?  What’s  the point.   We will have all sorts of time when we get this thing under control to see what was done right what was done wrong and hopefully  learn from it next time. But this incessant need to point fingers gets old. In fact it’s been old for a long time. It solves nothing. It gets us nowhere. In fact it gets in the way.

[lex24]

Seriously, why?  What’s  the point.   We will have all sorts of time when we get this thing under control to see what was done right what was done wrong and hopefully  learn from it next time. But this incessant need to point fingers gets old. In fact it’s been old for a long time. It solves nothing. It gets us nowhere. In fact it gets in the way.

[BostonCard]

I read the OP’s original point was meant to “point fingers” at China.

The ongoing fingerpointing at the current administration is warranted as long as the administration continues to push policies that are counterproductive and continues to push a narrative that finds fault in everyone and everything but the man in the mirror.

BCh

[BostonCard]

I read the OP’s original point was meant to “point fingers” at China.

The ongoing fingerpointing at the current administration is warranted as long as the administration continues to push policies that are counterproductive and continues to push a narrative that finds fault in everyone and everything but the man in the mirror.

BCh

[chrisk]

The response of Taiwan provides a complete refutation of any excuse making for the response of the US people and politicians.

Taiwan knew something serious was happening on December 31 and notified the WHO. But it did not wait for the WHO to act, it took action to mobilize its response. To say that the US does not have complete transparency to one of its closest allies is not believable. It is much more believable that the administration closed its eyes.



Here’s What It Really Knew and When

https://time.com/5826025/taiwan-who-trum...s-covid19/

At 6:30 a.m. on Dec. 31, Dr. Lo at Taiwan’s CDC woke to an alert on his phone.

His colleagues in the media monitoring unit had detected social media posts about a pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan...

Two Taiwanese clinicians, along with experts from Hong Kong and Macau, were on one of the first fact-finding teams to visit Wuhan. The Jan. 13-15 trip ...

Finally, he says an official admitted there were two family clusters among the confirmed cases, one involving a husband and his physically disabled wife. “The possibility of his wife [going] to the seafood market is zero so we can pretty much be sure that the husband transmitted it to his wife,” says Chuang. That knowledge was a game-changer...

Soon after the fact-finding team returned, Taiwan activated its Central Epidemic Command Center to coordinate an outbreak response. That was three days before Wuhan was locked down. Apprehensive about the information coming out of China, Taiwan remained hyper-vigilant, Lo says.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Taiwan nailed the virus immediately. It quickly put into place protocols that allowed it to reopen schools in February after a somewhat extended Lunar New Year break. There was no silly debate about wearing masks. At that point, the US had not even started to debate closing schools because very few people in the US were taking COVID seriously in February. Four months later, wearing masks is still not fully mandatory in the US.

[chrisk]

The response of Taiwan provides a complete refutation of any excuse making for the response of the US people and politicians.

Taiwan knew something serious was happening on December 31 and notified the WHO. But it did not wait for the WHO to act, it took action to mobilize its response. To say that the US does not have complete transparency to one of its closest allies is not believable. It is much more believable that the administration closed its eyes.



Here’s What It Really Knew and When

https://time.com/5826025/taiwan-who-trum...s-covid19/

At 6:30 a.m. on Dec. 31, Dr. Lo at Taiwan’s CDC woke to an alert on his phone.

His colleagues in the media monitoring unit had detected social media posts about a pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan...

Two Taiwanese clinicians, along with experts from Hong Kong and Macau, were on one of the first fact-finding teams to visit Wuhan. The Jan. 13-15 trip ...

Finally, he says an official admitted there were two family clusters among the confirmed cases, one involving a husband and his physically disabled wife. “The possibility of his wife [going] to the seafood market is zero so we can pretty much be sure that the husband transmitted it to his wife,” says Chuang. That knowledge was a game-changer...

Soon after the fact-finding team returned, Taiwan activated its Central Epidemic Command Center to coordinate an outbreak response. That was three days before Wuhan was locked down. Apprehensive about the information coming out of China, Taiwan remained hyper-vigilant, Lo says.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Taiwan nailed the virus immediately. It quickly put into place protocols that allowed it to reopen schools in February after a somewhat extended Lunar New Year break. There was no silly debate about wearing masks. At that point, the US had not even started to debate closing schools because very few people in the US were taking COVID seriously in February. Four months later, wearing masks is still not fully mandatory in the US.

[oregontim]

---

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

Maybe so... if the media and the Democrats hadn’t screamed non-stop that this was all just a hoax concocted by the Administration to divert attention from the Ukraine investigation and impeachment, which they indisputably would have done.

... instead of your hypothetical counterfactual, I am going to deal with the situation as it actually occurred, with the President not taking it seriously enough despite warnings not just from Democrats, but from experts in public health.  We also have 130,000 Americans dead, so forgive me for wondering whether a different approach by the President might have resulted in that number being smaller.



BC

Wait a minute...Your hypothetical counterfactual is just as hypothetical and counterfactual as mine ... The things he DID do were criticized heavily at the time and NONE of the Democrats ever said anything close to "hey, we've got a big problem here Nancy and Adam and Chuck, let's call a halt to this whole impeachment thing and focus on the real problem.

Whoa, so you're saying the president not paying enough attention, and 130,000 dead, is counterfactual? And that Dems should have called a halt to impeachment? Impeachment was in December, the Senate Trial ended Feb. 5. The catastrophic presidential failure of pandemic leadership started in late February and wasn't serious until his speech to the nation on March 12. The timelines don't match. Dems would have needed a time machine to do what you suggest they should have.

[oregontim]

---

Yes, but wouldn't we all agree that our problem with the pandemic in the US isn't that we didn't hear about it until January? Would our national response have been significantly more effective if we'd known in late November? Would that have meant testing and masks and such or an organized managed national effort?

Maybe so... if the media and the Democrats hadn’t screamed non-stop that this was all just a hoax concocted by the Administration to divert attention from the Ukraine investigation and impeachment, which they indisputably would have done.

... instead of your hypothetical counterfactual, I am going to deal with the situation as it actually occurred, with the President not taking it seriously enough despite warnings not just from Democrats, but from experts in public health.  We also have 130,000 Americans dead, so forgive me for wondering whether a different approach by the President might have resulted in that number being smaller.



BC

Wait a minute...Your hypothetical counterfactual is just as hypothetical and counterfactual as mine ... The things he DID do were criticized heavily at the time and NONE of the Democrats ever said anything close to "hey, we've got a big problem here Nancy and Adam and Chuck, let's call a halt to this whole impeachment thing and focus on the real problem.

Whoa, so you're saying the president not paying enough attention, and 130,000 dead, is counterfactual? And that Dems should have called a halt to impeachment? Impeachment was in December, the Senate Trial ended Feb. 5. The catastrophic presidential failure of pandemic leadership started in late February and wasn't serious until his speech to the nation on March 12. The timelines don't match. Dems would have needed a time machine to do what you suggest they should have.

[BostonCard]

I read the OP’s original point was meant to “point fingers” at China.

The ongoing fingerpointing at the current administration is warranted as long as the administration continues to push policies that are counterproductive and continues to push a narrative that finds fault in everyone and everything but the man in the mirror.

BCh

And here is why the ongoing finger pointing is important.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politic...n-n1232884

The administration’s new message is surrender monkey defeatism.  We give up trying to defeat the virus, so we just have to “live with it”.

BC

[BostonCard]

I read the OP’s original point was meant to “point fingers” at China.

The ongoing fingerpointing at the current administration is warranted as long as the administration continues to push policies that are counterproductive and continues to push a narrative that finds fault in everyone and everything but the man in the mirror.

BCh

And here is why the ongoing finger pointing is important.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politic...n-n1232884

The administration’s new message is surrender monkey defeatism.  We give up trying to defeat the virus, so we just have to “live with it”.

BC

[M T]

The author of this article Mick quoted appears to be intentionally misrepresenting things.
If one bothers to fact check it, its claims are false.  The author gives links which do not support, and often contradict, his claims.

The article claims:

• "China did not report the existence of the coronavirus in late 2019, according to a WHO timeline...."
  
• "This contradicts the agency’s initial timeline, which said that China first presented this information at that date."
  
• "The WHO’s updated timeline, posted online this week, now states that officials first learned about the virus on Dec. 31, 2019, through information posted on a U.S. website by doctors working in Wuhan, where the virus first emerged."
  

Those claims ("did not report", "contradicts" and "now states that officials first learned") are wrong.  I believe an email to ProMedMail would confirm that it was NOT posted by doctors working in Wuhan, and that it was posted by NYC MD at midnight EST.  There are also other claims that are wrong.

That initial timeline ACTUALLY said:

Last updated 27 April
31 Dec 2019
Wuhan Municipal Health Commission, China, reported a cluster of cases of pneumonia in Wuhan, Hubei Province. A novel coronavirus was eventually identified.

The (updated) UN timeline now starts off

31 Dec 2019
WHO’s Country Office in the People’s Republic of China picked up a media statement by the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission from their website on cases of ‘viral pneumonia’ in Wuhan, People’s Republic of China.

So, in fact, the updated WHO timeline indicates that the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission DID report the existence of the coronavirus in late 2019, and WHO did discover it directly from them.  Although more detailed, this reaffirms the initial report.

On the same day, the timeline also says

WHO’s Epidemic Intelligence from Open Sources (EIOS) platform also picked up a media report on ProMED (a programme of the International Society for Infectious Diseases) about the same cluster of cases of “pneumonia of unknown cause”, in Wuhan.

Several health authorities from around the world contacted WHO seeking additional information.

So, WHO was also notified the same day from a number of sources, one of which was highlighted by the article quoted above, and the others were, uh, mysteriously ignored.

The ProMed report was published at 23:59(EST?) 30-Dec =? 04:59 UTC. It contained the translation of
  1)  Chinese news article published at 02:16 UTC (attributed to Sina Finance) which was prompted by a note (on the (Chinese) night of the 30th (so, before 30 Dec 16:00 UTC) on the website of the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission.
  2)  Chinese news article published at 03:03 UTC (attributed to 21st Century Business Herald)
The ProMed report does not contain anything I can see to support the claim that it was posted "by doctors working in Wuhan".  The posting has the two translated articles (one marked as "machine translation") plus some annotations by "modMPP": Marjorie P. Pollack, MD – MPP, Deputy Editor, ProMED-mail, out of NYC

(Anther early news report of the unknown pneumonia
31 Dec 07:55 UTC Reuters mentions info from state broadcaster CCTV, social media of Wuhan Municipal Health Commission and of  official People’s Daily newspaper  (I previously mentioned this, but was confused by the time zone)  )

On April 10, I reported that China notified WHO & other countries on January 3. (Partly based on the WHO Feb 24 report and China's timeline (April 6))


WHO's January 5 report correctly states "On 31 December 2019, the WHO China Country Office was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology (unknown cause) detected in Wuhan City, Hubei Province of China."

I don't see anything that can substantiate any claim that WHO in Geneva saw it before WHO's Country Office in China.  The claim in that article is that WHO in Geneva saw the PubMed report.  That came out at 7AM Geneva time.  By that time, it was 1PM in China.  WHO indicates WHO in China saw it in the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission web site, where it had been posted the night before.  I expect phones were busy that morning, and I'd bet that WHO China saw the website before the PubMed report came out.

------
The article also gives a link as though it supports the claim in this sentence
"Chinese officials and state-controlled media also claimed for months that the communist regime informed the WHO on or around Dec. 31."
Follow that link and you won't find a reference to "December" or "January".  That link does not support the author's claim.

Then the author states
"In recent days, however, Chinese officials have dropped that talking point."
as though that link changes something.  That link states the same thing that has long been reported: "On January 3, China started to send regular updates to WHO as well as other countries and regions, including the US."  That link does not support the author's claim.

[M T]

The author of this article Mick quoted appears to be intentionally misrepresenting things.
If one bothers to fact check it, its claims are false.  The author gives links which do not support, and often contradict, his claims.

The article claims:

• "China did not report the existence of the coronavirus in late 2019, according to a WHO timeline...."
  
• "This contradicts the agency’s initial timeline, which said that China first presented this information at that date."
  
• "The WHO’s updated timeline, posted online this week, now states that officials first learned about the virus on Dec. 31, 2019, through information posted on a U.S. website by doctors working in Wuhan, where the virus first emerged."
  

Those claims ("did not report", "contradicts" and "now states that officials first learned") are wrong.  I believe an email to ProMedMail would confirm that it was NOT posted by doctors working in Wuhan, and that it was posted by NYC MD at midnight EST.  There are also other claims that are wrong.

That initial timeline ACTUALLY said:

Last updated 27 April
31 Dec 2019
Wuhan Municipal Health Commission, China, reported a cluster of cases of pneumonia in Wuhan, Hubei Province. A novel coronavirus was eventually identified.

The (updated) UN timeline now starts off

31 Dec 2019
WHO’s Country Office in the People’s Republic of China picked up a media statement by the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission from their website on cases of ‘viral pneumonia’ in Wuhan, People’s Republic of China.

So, in fact, the updated WHO timeline indicates that the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission DID report the existence of the coronavirus in late 2019, and WHO did discover it directly from them.  Although more detailed, this reaffirms the initial report.

On the same day, the timeline also says

WHO’s Epidemic Intelligence from Open Sources (EIOS) platform also picked up a media report on ProMED (a programme of the International Society for Infectious Diseases) about the same cluster of cases of “pneumonia of unknown cause”, in Wuhan.

Several health authorities from around the world contacted WHO seeking additional information.

So, WHO was also notified the same day from a number of sources, one of which was highlighted by the article quoted above, and the others were, uh, mysteriously ignored.

The ProMed report was published at 23:59(EST?) 30-Dec =? 04:59 UTC. It contained the translation of
  1)  Chinese news article published at 02:16 UTC (attributed to Sina Finance) which was prompted by a note (on the (Chinese) night of the 30th (so, before 30 Dec 16:00 UTC) on the website of the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission.
  2)  Chinese news article published at 03:03 UTC (attributed to 21st Century Business Herald)
The ProMed report does not contain anything I can see to support the claim that it was posted "by doctors working in Wuhan".  The posting has the two translated articles (one marked as "machine translation") plus some annotations by "modMPP": Marjorie P. Pollack, MD – MPP, Deputy Editor, ProMED-mail, out of NYC

(Anther early news report of the unknown pneumonia
31 Dec 07:55 UTC Reuters mentions info from state broadcaster CCTV, social media of Wuhan Municipal Health Commission and of  official People’s Daily newspaper  (I previously mentioned this, but was confused by the time zone)  )

On April 10, I reported that China notified WHO & other countries on January 3. (Partly based on the WHO Feb 24 report and China's timeline (April 6))


WHO's January 5 report correctly states "On 31 December 2019, the WHO China Country Office was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology (unknown cause) detected in Wuhan City, Hubei Province of China."

I don't see anything that can substantiate any claim that WHO in Geneva saw it before WHO's Country Office in China.  The claim in that article is that WHO in Geneva saw the PubMed report.  That came out at 7AM Geneva time.  By that time, it was 1PM in China.  WHO indicates WHO in China saw it in the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission web site, where it had been posted the night before.  I expect phones were busy that morning, and I'd bet that WHO China saw the website before the PubMed report came out.

------
The article also gives a link as though it supports the claim in this sentence
"Chinese officials and state-controlled media also claimed for months that the communist regime informed the WHO on or around Dec. 31."
Follow that link and you won't find a reference to "December" or "January".  That link does not support the author's claim.

Then the author states
"In recent days, however, Chinese officials have dropped that talking point."
as though that link changes something.  That link states the same thing that has long been reported: "On January 3, China started to send regular updates to WHO as well as other countries and regions, including the US."  That link does not support the author's claim.

[oregontim]

Seriously, why?  What’s  the point.   We will have all sorts of time when we get this thing under control to see what was done right what was done wrong and hopefully  learn from it next time. But this incessant need to point fingers gets old. In fact it’s been old for a long time. It solves nothing. It gets us nowhere. In fact it gets in the way.

I agree that pointing the finger at China does nobody any good. But pointing the finger at a president in power, while he is still in power, could be part of the solution to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. He has the power to change the tone at any time. He could put the CDC and Fauci back into the driver's seat and stay in the background, supporting our national experts, at any time. He could rehire the experts he fired. He could appoint somebody to manage masks and tracing and testing right. He could reconnect with WHO. Not pointing fingers at him is giving up on our country's response to pandemic. We don't have to wait until November to change the course.

[oregontim]

Seriously, why?  What’s  the point.   We will have all sorts of time when we get this thing under control to see what was done right what was done wrong and hopefully  learn from it next time. But this incessant need to point fingers gets old. In fact it’s been old for a long time. It solves nothing. It gets us nowhere. In fact it gets in the way.

I agree that pointing the finger at China does nobody any good. But pointing the finger at a president in power, while he is still in power, could be part of the solution to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. He has the power to change the tone at any time. He could put the CDC and Fauci back into the driver's seat and stay in the background, supporting our national experts, at any time. He could rehire the experts he fired. He could appoint somebody to manage masks and tracing and testing right. He could reconnect with WHO. Not pointing fingers at him is giving up on our country's response to pandemic. We don't have to wait until November to change the course.

[BostonCard]

Wait a minute...Your hypothetical counterfactual is just as hypothetical and counterfactual as mine ... The things he DID do were criticized heavily at the time and NONE of the Democrats ever said anything close to "hey, we've got a big problem here Nancy and Adam and Chuck, let's call a halt to this whole impeachment thing and focus on the real problem. 

Whoa, so you're saying the president not paying enough attention, and 130,000 dead, is counterfactual? And that Dems should have called a halt to impeachment? Impeachment was in December, the Senate Trial ended Feb. 5. The catastrophic presidential failure of pandemic leadership started in late February and wasn't serious until his speech to the nation on March 12. The timelines don't match. Dems would have needed a time machine to do what you suggest they should have.

In LSJU’s defense, I think the counter factual that he is pointing out is the idea that a different president, or a different course of action, would have resulted in fewer deaths.  And, to a degree he’s right; I can’t prove that a hypothetical President Clinton would have done any better, or that following a different course of action would have resulted in fewer deaths.

So, it is a fair point.  Then again, at least I was critiquing Trump for what he did/failed to do,  not for what congress hypothetically would have done had Trump done something different.

BC

[BostonCard]

Wait a minute...Your hypothetical counterfactual is just as hypothetical and counterfactual as mine ... The things he DID do were criticized heavily at the time and NONE of the Democrats ever said anything close to "hey, we've got a big problem here Nancy and Adam and Chuck, let's call a halt to this whole impeachment thing and focus on the real problem. 

Whoa, so you're saying the president not paying enough attention, and 130,000 dead, is counterfactual? And that Dems should have called a halt to impeachment? Impeachment was in December, the Senate Trial ended Feb. 5. The catastrophic presidential failure of pandemic leadership started in late February and wasn't serious until his speech to the nation on March 12. The timelines don't match. Dems would have needed a time machine to do what you suggest they should have.

In LSJU’s defense, I think the counter factual that he is pointing out is the idea that a different president, or a different course of action, would have resulted in fewer deaths.  And, to a degree he’s right; I can’t prove that a hypothetical President Clinton would have done any better, or that following a different course of action would have resulted in fewer deaths.

So, it is a fair point.  Then again, at least I was critiquing Trump for what he did/failed to do,  not for what congress hypothetically would have done had Trump done something different.

BC

[lex24]

Seriously, why?  What’s  the point.   We will have all sorts of time when we get this thing under control to see what was done right what was done wrong and hopefully  learn from it next time. But this incessant need to point fingers gets old. In fact it’s been old for a long time. It solves nothing. It gets us nowhere. In fact it gets in the way.

I agree that pointing the finger at China does nobody any good. But pointing the finger at a president in power, while he is still in power, could be part of the solution to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. He has the power to change the tone at any time. He could put the CDC and Fauci back into the driver's seat and stay in the background, supporting our national experts, at any time. He could rehire the experts he fired. He could appoint somebody to manage masks and tracing and testing right. He could reconnect with WHO. Not pointing fingers at him is giving up on our country's response to pandemic. We don't have to wait until November to change the course.

You missed my point completely.

[lex24]

Seriously, why?  What’s  the point.   We will have all sorts of time when we get this thing under control to see what was done right what was done wrong and hopefully  learn from it next time. But this incessant need to point fingers gets old. In fact it’s been old for a long time. It solves nothing. It gets us nowhere. In fact it gets in the way.

I agree that pointing the finger at China does nobody any good. But pointing the finger at a president in power, while he is still in power, could be part of the solution to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. He has the power to change the tone at any time. He could put the CDC and Fauci back into the driver's seat and stay in the background, supporting our national experts, at any time. He could rehire the experts he fired. He could appoint somebody to manage masks and tracing and testing right. He could reconnect with WHO. Not pointing fingers at him is giving up on our country's response to pandemic. We don't have to wait until November to change the course.

You missed my point completely.

[Mick]

Given the pressure to publish in China and the apparent gaming of statistics, I'd be curious to know whether (a) the MDs on this board have confidence in any published paper that emerges from the Chinese medical community and (b) would that extend to pronouncements and information on infectious diseases like COVID-19?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinese-res...1593939600

[Mick]

Given the pressure to publish in China and the apparent gaming of statistics, I'd be curious to know whether (a) the MDs on this board have confidence in any published paper that emerges from the Chinese medical community and (b) would that extend to pronouncements and information on infectious diseases like COVID-19?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/chinese-res...1593939600